Fix RelationIdGetRelation calls that weren't bothering with error checks.
Some of these are quite old, but that doesn't make them not bugs. We'd rather report a failure via elog than SIGSEGV. While at it, uniformly spell the error check as !RelationIsValid(rel) rather than a bare rel == NULL test. The machine code is the same but it seems better to be consistent. Coverity complained about this today, not sure why, because the mistake is in fact old.
This commit is contained in:
parent
d807200b4a
commit
69f883fef1
@ -8128,6 +8128,9 @@ ExtractReplicaIdentity(Relation relation, HeapTuple tp, bool key_changed, bool *
|
||||
|
||||
idx_rel = RelationIdGetRelation(replidindex);
|
||||
|
||||
if (!RelationIsValid(idx_rel))
|
||||
elog(ERROR, "could not open relation with OID %u", replidindex);
|
||||
|
||||
/* deform tuple, so we have fast access to columns */
|
||||
heap_deform_tuple(tp, desc, values, nulls);
|
||||
|
||||
|
@ -1553,7 +1553,7 @@ ReorderBufferCommit(ReorderBuffer *rb, TransactionId xid,
|
||||
|
||||
relation = RelationIdGetRelation(reloid);
|
||||
|
||||
if (relation == NULL)
|
||||
if (!RelationIsValid(relation))
|
||||
elog(ERROR, "could not open relation with OID %u (for filenode \"%s\")",
|
||||
reloid,
|
||||
relpathperm(change->data.tp.relnode,
|
||||
@ -1671,7 +1671,7 @@ ReorderBufferCommit(ReorderBuffer *rb, TransactionId xid,
|
||||
|
||||
relation = RelationIdGetRelation(relid);
|
||||
|
||||
if (relation == NULL)
|
||||
if (!RelationIsValid(relation))
|
||||
elog(ERROR, "could not open relation with OID %u", relid);
|
||||
|
||||
if (!RelationIsLogicallyLogged(relation))
|
||||
@ -3031,6 +3031,10 @@ ReorderBufferToastReplace(ReorderBuffer *rb, ReorderBufferTXN *txn,
|
||||
desc = RelationGetDescr(relation);
|
||||
|
||||
toast_rel = RelationIdGetRelation(relation->rd_rel->reltoastrelid);
|
||||
if (!RelationIsValid(toast_rel))
|
||||
elog(ERROR, "could not open relation with OID %u",
|
||||
relation->rd_rel->reltoastrelid);
|
||||
|
||||
toast_desc = RelationGetDescr(toast_rel);
|
||||
|
||||
/* should we allocate from stack instead? */
|
||||
|
Loading…
x
Reference in New Issue
Block a user